Robert Hansen (RH) posted Mar 13, 2014 9:05 AM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9411156) - GSC's remarks interspersed: > > On Mar 12, 2014, at 8:48 PM, GS Chandy > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > Despite a great many serious weaknesses in the way > > it has been framed - and even more deficiencies in > > the way it is implemented - the RTE is ostensibly > > intended to ensure 'equity in education?. > > This is political educational theory. It is based on > class. It has been tried here and it doesn?t work. > This has not been tried *effectively* anywhere (USA or in India; I understand that some of the Scandinavian nations have progressed a bit along those lines, but I wouldn't know much about that). In order to do that *effectively*, some basic understanding ('working knowledge', WK) of 'systems' is required by the stakeholders of the systems under consideration, but I see little or nothing of such WK anywhere - NOT even amongst most 'systems scientists'! It's not there in India; it's not there in the USA. Perhaps mothers of infants in the US and in India do have this intuitively, before our systems have got hold of them and warped their minds. Check out my post dt. Mar 13, 2014 11:20 AM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9411169) for some possibly relevant thoughts on such issues. [I cannot be certain about the following, but one of the problems you may be facing is that you are unable to perceive just how 'conventional educational theory' impacts 'political ! educational theory' and vice-versa]. > > Maybe the circumstances in India are different. We > have a saying. You can take the girl out of the > country but you can?t take the country out of the > girl. > The circumstances in India are not really all that different, because most of our *'ruling culture'* has been coming from the USA. > > In dire situations, the deciding factor isn?t > equity, it is culture. Educational theory, > conventional or political, can?t change culture. The > bonds are just too strong. To change culture you need > to go far beyond education. You have to take on the > entire role of raising the child. And even then, > there seems to be a great deal of regression. It > makes you wonder if culture is a choice or a fate. My > personal belief is that there is a measure, call it a > culture quotient or CQ, that measures one?s ability > to make good cultural choices. The higher the CQ the > better one is in choosing between good cultural > elements and bad cultural elements. And the direness > we see in some situations in society is not due to IQ > but to CQ. I think as modern society began to shun long > standing > institutions in favor of personal choice, it left > those with low CQ, unable to make such choices, > stranded. > Yes to your thoughts that '*educational theory*' by itself cannot change '*culture'* (though it can certainly "CONTRIBUTE TO" the changing of some aspects of '*culture'*), but no to your ideas about 'CQ' (insofar as I've understood them). What could help change 'CQ' is, I claim, a very simple thing indeed: some '*working knowledge*' of the *system meaning* of the relationships "CONTRIBUTES TO" in the stakeholders ofr the systems under consideration. > > Btw, equity in education, in the conventional sense, > means that every student has access to a school > sufficient to fulfill the goal, to maximize their > outcome. > I see. And how does that 'equity in education' (in the conventional sense) square up with the fact that children of parents in 'lower-income groups' will NEVER be able to get hold of needed books and other 'learning material' that children of parents having incomes of, say, US $ 200K per annum can take for granted? These are fairly 'complex' issues, and discussing such issues in the conventional 'pure prose mode' is generally quite fruitless (and such discussions usually turn out to be exercises in frustration for all sides: just visit almost any discussion right here at Math-teach to see what I mean by this claim).
(I often enclose some words/phrases between stars [*---*], to indicate that the 'system meaning' of the word/phrase significantly extends the definitions found in conventional dictionaries. To explain these extensions in 'pure prose' would be tiresome and fruitless).
GSC ("Still Shoveling! Not PUSHING!! Not GOADING!!!")